Organizational Gaps in the Techniques

Hello all,

I've been looking at the techniques document for gaps but in terms of
content it seems very strong.  I think what we need to work on is
organization.  The following ideas might increase the readability, and
therefore the usefulness, of the document:

1. Some of the techniques are really requirements to fulfil the
checkpoint (techniques for which we can not think of another way to do
something, ex. all techniques starting with "ensure"), while others are
merely suggestions (just one of several ways to do something).  I think
we should pull these apart by, at least, placing them under different
headers for each checkpoint.  The requirements are also the things that
we'll be asking evaluators to directly check for in the evaluation
process.

2. I'd prefer not to see very similar techniques under different
checkpoints.  Instead, a multiply appearing technique could be placed
under the most relevant checkpoint and other checkpoints could have a
section of links to the checkpoint under which the technique now
appears. (Ex. for 1.1)

3. Not everything needs a sample.  Just those things in which we are
suggesting a particular interface functionality that might need more
explanation.

4. There should only be one reference section per checkpoint and it
should be distinguishable from the other techniques.

Cheers,
Jan

-- 
Jan Richards
Access Software Designer
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre
University of Toronto

Phone: (416) 946-7060
Fax:   (416) 971-2896
Email: jan.richards@utoronto.ca

Received on Tuesday, 26 September 2000 13:51:18 UTC